ArticleOncology reports2019
Transcriptomic analysis and identification of prognostic biomarkers in cholangiocarcinoma.
Article in Oncology reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- nNav1.5 mRNA Expression in Triple Negative and Non-Triple Negative Breast Cancer Patients Treated at Hospital Pakar Universiti Sains Malaysia.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2025Article
- Whole Transcriptome Sequencing Analyzes the Interactions of mRNAs and ncRNAs in Cholangiocarcinoma.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Protein regulator of cytokinesis 1 accentuates cholangiocarcinoma progression via mTORC1-mediated glycolysis.Human cell · 2024Article
- Detection of reproducible liver cancer specific ligand-receptor signaling in blood.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2024Article
- Integrin β5 is an independent prognostic marker for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma in a Chinese population.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- Development and validation of machine learning models for predicting prognosis and guiding individualized postoperative chemotherapy: A real-world study of distal cholangiocarcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Novel biomarkers and the future of targeted therapies in cholangiocarcinoma: a narrative review.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2022Review
- Biomarkers and Genetic Markers of Hepatocellular Carcinoma and Cholangiocarcinoma-What Do We Already Know.Cancers · 2022Review
- Review
- Behavioral and Gene Expression Analysis of Stxbp6-Knockout Mice.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- Analysis of transcriptome in the relationship between expression of PRC1 protein and prognosis of patients with cholangiocarcinoma.The Journal of international medical research · 2021Article
- Identification and Validation of Three Autophagy-Related Long Noncoding RNAs as Prognostic Signature in Cholangiocarcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Integrative Analysis for Elucidating Transcriptomics Landscapes of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Article
- Profiles of alternative splicing events in the diagnosis and prognosis of Gastric Cancer.Journal of Cancer · 2021Article
- Article
- Co-expression based cancer staging and application.Scientific reports · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is acknowledged as the second most commonly diagnosed primary liver tumor and is associated with a poor patient prognosis. The present study aimed to explore the biological functions, signaling pathways and potential prognostic biomarkers involved in CCA through transcriptomic analysis. Based on the transcriptomic dataset of CCA from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), differentially expressed protein‑coding genes (DEGs) were identified. Biological function enrichment analysis, including Gene Ontology (GO) analysis and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathway enrichment analysis, was applied. Through protein‑protein interaction (PPI) network analysis, hub genes were identified and further verified using open‑access datasets and qRT‑PCR. Finally, a survival analysis was conducted. A total of 1,463 DEGs were distinguished, including 267 upregulated genes and 1,196 downregulated genes. For the GO analysis, the upregulated DEGs were enriched in 'cadherin binding in cell‑cell adhesion', 'extracellular matrix (ECM) organization' and 'cell‑cell adherens junctions'. Correspondingly, the downregulated DEGs were enriched in the 'oxidation‑reduction process', 'extracellular exosomes' and 'blood microparticles'. In regards to the KEGG pathway analysis, the upregulated DEGs were enriched in 'ECM‑receptor interactions', 'focal adhesions' and 'small cell lung cancer'. The downregulated DEGs were enriched in 'metabolic pathways', 'complement and coagulation cascades' and 'biosynthesis of antibiotics'. The PPI network suggested that CDK1 and another 20 genes were hub genes. Furthermore, survival analysis suggested that CDK1, MKI67, TOP2A and PRC1 were significantly associated with patient prognosis. These results enhance the current understanding of CCA development and provide new insight into distinguishing candidate biomarkers for predicting the prognosis of CCA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.